I wear regular glasses and 3D glasses have never bothered me in theaters or at home. Only negative about using them at home is they darken everything so I can't see around me (my cats don't like that.) And yes, I've adjusted the brightness and contrast on my TV in 3D mode to compensate, using test patterns.

Cant stand 3D I dont know if this is common for most people but I find it makes me sick to my stomach and gives me really bad headaches. I think 3D is just a cash grab for a lot of the studios and it sure reflects it in admission price. Granted some movies look great in 3D but some have serious issues. I hope its on its way out so I can start saving a few bucks and not paying 12 bucks for a headache.

I love it!

In my opinion, 3D isn't a "fad" anymore. So many viewers love it, pay to see them, and so many filmmakers are on board with it now that it just may have a permanent place in the industry for the foreseeable future. The current 3D is completely different from what the true 3D "fad" back years ago was.

I love it when it is done right - either filmed in 3D or a very well done conversion, and if given the choice and if the 3D is proper, I'll pay for the 3D version every single time. I have a 3D TV at home and the same applies there unless I just want something to play in the background. But if there is a 3D version, and I'm gong to sit down to flat out watch a movie, I'll watch the 3D version every time. Heck, I think the 3D effects are even better at home than they are at the theater.

My only true complaint about 3D at the moment is how I feel it is almost "wrong" for theaters to charge a higher price for the 3D version. I will go as far to say that I think it is fine to charge the higher price for those who go without a pair of glasses, but if you show up with a pair of 3D glasses from a previous film, I think you should only have to pay the normal price. That makes perfect sense to me, but I get why they are doing it for the time being at least. I think, or at least hope, that they will change how they do that in the future.

The only 3D movies where the 3D was worth a damn were movies that had good directors who knew what they were doing (Spielberg: TinTin, Scorsese: Hugo, Cameron: Avatar, Scott: Prometheus, Lee: Life of Pi, Wenders: Pina), and even then I prefer the movie in 2D. Also, except for Cameron, it doesn't look like any of these good directors (or any others) are doing any more 3D movies anytime soon.

Fuck it, just go see Alien!

I was thinking the same thing..."Hey, Alien is playing!"

I saw the director's cut of Alien in 35mm blown up on an IMAX screen during its brief theatrical release prior to the Alien Quadrilogy coming out on DVD. I don't think a 2K DCP could top that.

Also, to throw more fire into the 2D/3D screens conversation: The Great Gatsby, a film conceived and shot in 3D, will have 21 screens in Vegas presenting the 2D version and 18 presenting the 3D version.

LOL why is the Great Gatsby in 3D?

I just saw a 2K DCP of 12 Monkeys that I couldn't distinguish from film.

Gatsby keeps flicking his cigarette butts at the camera.

3D is a fad. It might be a fad that last a bit longer than people hoped it would but it will be gone eventually.

Or maybe it won't since people seem to get dumber by the year. Who knows.

I, for one, despise it. I've seen about 3 films in 3D (Avatar, Tron Legacy, The Hobbit) and every one of them was bad experience.

In what way? Granted Avatar was a lousey movie, but Tron was good and looked great and The Hobbit was very good.

At last, F Scott Fitzgerald's vision will be complete.